How farming practices have developed in Seoul, South Korea from the 1960s to the 2010s: Focusing on The Green Revolution Technology, Organic Farming and Urban Farming Hyesun Kim Creative Sustainability How farming practices have developed in Seoul, South Korea from the 1960s to the 2010s: Focusing on The Green Revolution Technology, Organic Farming and Urban Farming Hyesun Kim Creative Sustainability Master's Thesis Creative Susutainability, Design Department Aalto University School of Arts, Design and Architecture 2017 Hyesun Kim Supervisor: CS programme director Mikko Jalas Advisor: Ph.D Hamed Haque How farming practices have developed in Seoul, South Korea from the 1960s to the 2010s: Focusing on The Green Revolution Technology, Organic Farming and Urban Farming Hyesun Kim Creative Sustainability How farming practices have developed in Seoul, South Korea from the 1960s to the 2010s: Focusing on The Green Revolution Technology, Organic Farming and Urban Farming Hyesun Kim Creative Sustainability Acknowledgements This thesis could not be even started without supporting from many people. Particu- larly, I would like to express my gratitude to Mikko Jalas who is my supervisors. He helps me to build the theoretical framework from the beginning and supervises the whole process of it in the end. Also, I thank my advisor, Hamed Haque who guides me to make the details of the thesis. Special thanks to all my interviewees, Lee Changwoo, Jang Dongheon, Bang Jeonghui, Lee Eunjeon and Lee Hyosun who share their time and stories. All Creative Sustainability members and friends support to complete the thesis giving me the opportunity to explore the sustainable world. Writing thesis is the great learning process and I really appreciate it. 4 Urban Farming Aalto University, P.O.BOX 11000, 00076 AALTO www.aalto.fi Master of Arts thesis abstract Author Hyesun Kim Title of thesis How farming practices have developed in Seoul, South Korea from the 1960s to the 2010s: Focusing on the green revolution technology, organic farming and urban farming. Department Design Department Degree programme Creative sustainability Master's Degree programme Year 2017 Number of pages 77+3 Language English ABSTRACT In the 1970s, growing vegetables in one’s house was common in South Korea. My grandmother also had a small garden in her yard and on the top of her roof. She grew vegetables, such as red peppers, green onions and lettuces. Today, I buy a variety of vegetables from supermarkets, including imported food from all over the world. The initial research question asks the reason why my grandmother and I consume food differently. My research investigates what caused this change and how different farm- ingagricultural practices development have influenced tells our a story purchasing how we behavior can acquire in daily food life. from The supermarkets progress of as consumers. This thesis begins with sustainability and systems thinking to explain thefarmers fourth of designurban farming.generation. In terms The thesis of the examines framework, the social definition, practice categories theory allows and new us to conceive farming as a social practice with three central concepts: materials, com- petences and meanings. The case study explores Seoul, South Korea through institu- tional data, media reports, and interviews. This city is a good example of urbanization because South Korea has developed radically in the last fifty years with high speed and enormoussince 2008 expansion. with strong In support recent years,from the urban city farming government. in Seoul Hopefully, has significantly the thesis grown could provide a better lens to understand urban farming as a continuous progress of farming practices. Keywords farming practices, agricultural development, sustainability, systems think- ing, urban farming, social practice theory, Seoul CONTENTS PART A: INTRODUCTION AND RESEARCH QUESTIONS 1. Introduction 1-1. Sustainability, systems thinking, design thinking 8 1-2. Aims and research questions 11 Different farming practices in Korea from the 1960s to the 2010s 2. The2-1. classificationConcept development of urban offarming urban farming 12 Link to urban ecosystems 2-2. Different categories of urban farming 16 School gardens, community gardens, urban farms and guerrilla gardens 2-3. Participants: Who are the new farmers? 20 Strength and weakness of the new farmers 2-4. Different arguments of urban farming 23 PART B: THE FRAMEWORK AND METHODS 3. The theoretical framework 28 Social practice theory: materials, competences and meanings 4. Methods and data sources 30 Scope of the case study: Interviews, institutional data and the media reports 6 Urban Farming PART C: THE CASE STUDY AND ANALYSIS 5. The Case Study from Seoul, South Korea 5-1. Outline of time (1960-2010) and place 36 5-2. Population and industry 38 5-3. Land use 41 5-4. City planning 42 6. Different technologies, competences and meanings 6-1. Development of different farming practices (1960~2000) 6-1-1. The green revolution technology: for eliminating hunger 1) The 1960s: Overcome starvation 45 2) The 1970s: HYVs and a package of technology 48 3) The 1980s: White revolution technology 50 4) The 1990s: Globalization, urbanization and mechanization 52 Reflecting5) Two methods: on the greenBiochemistry revolution and technology: mechanization Productivity 53 6-1-2. Organic farming: for agricultural sustainability 1) Non-chemical inputs and information technology 56 58 2)3) ClearTechnical regulation trends inand practice the numbers and systems of articles of certification 60 7 Seoul 6-2. Urban farming 6-2-1. Vertical farming as a new technology 62 6-2-2. Different sets of knowledge and skills 1) Individual motivation 64 2) Co-creation 66 6-2-3. Public opinions of urban farming 1) Newspaper coverage of urban farming 67 2) The survey conducted by The Seoul Institute 68 6-3. Summary of three different farming practices 73 Transformation of technologies, competences and social meanings PART D: CONCLUSION 7. Conclusion and discussion 76 Urban farming as a continuous progress of farming practices The limitation of the study Discussion: How can urban farming contribute to sustainability? BIBLIOGRAPHY 78 8 Urban Farming PART A INTRODUCTION AND RESEARCH QUESTIONS 1 Introduction 2 The classification of urban farming 9 Seoul 1. Introduction 1-1. Sustainability, systems thinking, design thinking Holling (2001) who is an ecologist and one of the founders of ecological eco- nomics defines sustainability as, “Sustainability is the capacity to create, test, and maintain adaptive capabil- ity” (Holling 2001) Aswould sustainability be systems highlights thinking. Systemsa holistic thinkers perspective, endeavored the most to enlighteninfluential not theory only living organisms but also non-organic structures. They studied the relation- ships between systems and subsystems with an interest in the function to sup- port entire systems. Systems thinkers often emphasize interconnectivity to draw a whole system. Systems theory supposes that the world consists of vari- ous subsystems having a structure with hierarchical orders so that all systems interconnect with each other in dynamics. Due to the complexity of the theory, since it involves interconnection and a - holisticceeded toapproach, deliver the justification proper explanation of systems of theory systems is ornot not. easy From whether the positive it suc side,systematic the influence management of systems as their theory design on designtasks. Thisallows requires designers deeper to represent levels of understanding and applies multiple processes rather than linear methods. - Systemiccilitators designersto provoke influenced social transformation by systems thinking through often handling stress political the role issues of fa (Jones 2014). From the negative side, systems theory has been criticized be- cause of its complication and complexity, which easily leads to misunderstand- 10 Urban Farming ing. Ackoff (2004) who is the pioneer of systems thinking mentions that, “The systems movement has been critiqued as failed, solipsistic or unrealistic (Ackoff, 2004, Collopy, 2009, Jones, 2009), leading some to call for integrating systems thinking with practical methods of design practice” (Jones 2014) For this reason, systemic thinkers blend system thinking with design think- ing considering design thinking as a practical method. They expect a feasible application through design thinking to make the real action in the world. To illustrate the progress of combination of systems theory and design thinking, Jones (2014) draws four types of design generations from the 1960s to the 2000s. Table 1 shows in details. Generation First Second Third Fourth Orientation Rational Pragmatic Phenomenological Generative the 1960s the 1970s the 1980s the 2000s Methods Movement from Instrumentality Design research Generative, craft to Methods and stakeholder empathic & standardized customized to methods transdisciplinary methods context Design cognition Authors & Simon, Fuller Rittel, Jones Archer, Norman Dubberly, Trends Design Wicked User-centered Sanders Science problems & participatory Generative design Planning Evolution design Service design Systems Sciences Natural systems System dynamics Complexity influences Systems Hard systems Social systems engineering Soft systems Table 1. Four Generations of Design Methods (Jones 2014) Each design generation has developed by changing the main issues. For exam- ple, design trends shifted from engineering to complexity and design attitudes